Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2021/07/18

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: [Leica] Leica Elmar 90mm f4 LTM
From: lluisripollphotography at gmail.com (Lluis Ripoll)
Date: Sun, 18 Jul 2021 14:32:21 +0200
References: <B7ECDFB9-86C7-4E92-99ED-EBD72BB7F3CA@mac.com> <f6945943-d983-3cd3-4de8-272314a2f8e8@gmail.com> <907501B6-7D68-4B03-89E1-41C5CEA4ADDB@mac.com> <819f7742-9e28-bd04-20bc-b98fa1d914c2@lighttube.net> <451215FF-752A-429A-9A21-5F94F7E65792@mac.com>

Fortunately in my Leica experience I had the chance to use several 90 lenses

Elmar 9 cm f4 on my Leca IIIF times, it was a very nice compact lenses, 
smooth tones and resolution
Elmarit 90 f 2.8 M, it was too soft contrasted for me
Summicron 90 R, I loved this one, maybe my favorite 90
Tele-Elmarit 90 M F 2.8, a wonderful compact lens, useful!
Summicron 90 AA, excellent and somertimes too sharp

Lluis



> El 18 jul 2021, a les 5:47, Jeffery Smith via LUG <lug at leica-users.org> 
> va escriure:
> 
> Ah, so it is younger than me, and in much better shape. Thanks very much 
> Jim. That is where I was hoping it would be. Non clinical, nice bokeh.
> 
> Jeffery
> 
>> On Jul 17, 2021, at 8:39 PM, Jim Nichols <jhnichols at lighttube.net> 
>> wrote:
>> 
>> Jeffery,
>> 
>> Lenses made in 1951 range from 840001 to 950000.
>> 
>> On 7/17/21 10:04 PM, Jeffery Smith via LUG wrote:
>>> I have about 7 LTM cameras, and like most of them. I'll check the serial 
>>> number next time I'm in the house (I'm stationed in Mom'a garage). The 
>>> lens I got is remarkably clean, no haze, no fungus, no "cleaning marks 
>>> that don't affect the performance". It is absolutely single coated (if 
>>> even that). It looks unused...the question is why nobody used it. We'll 
>>> see.
>>> 
>>> I'm pondering which film to use since I want to do at least E.I. 800 
>>> because the folks at the barbecue are in perpetual motion, and it will 
>>> be under an awning that blocks much of the sun.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Okay, my serial number is 874068. And it has an interesting feature than 
>>> was not intentional...the metal body cap also functions as a lens cap. 
>>> It screws into the body, but pushes onto the end of the lens.
>>> 
>>> Thanks for the information Frank. I hope this  is a keeper.
>>> 
>>> Jeffery
>>> 
>>>> On Jul 17, 2021, at 7:49 PM, Frank Filippone via LUG <lug at 
>>>> leica-users.org> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> I have one that has a serial number below 100,000, which makes it about 
>>>> as old as a Leica lens can be.... ( before 1931.. 90 years old)
>>>> 
>>>> It is, when mounted with the appropriate adapter and used on an M9,  
>>>> almost as sharp in the center as a 90 Elmarit ( the thin, Modern M 
>>>> one).  It is quite soft as you head towards the corners.  The Elmarit 
>>>> is not.
>>>> 
>>>> I tested it against the later reincarnations, a silver 60's model, and 
>>>> did not find a significant difference.
>>>> 
>>>> It is NOT the clinical look of the 90AA nor the 90 Summarit.
>>>> 
>>>> I am going to test the 90's I have to find their strengths and 
>>>> weaknesses.  I will add it to my list of lenses.
>>>> 
>>>> It will take a while to test, but I will state the results here....
>>>> 
>>>> BTW, I have a 90 ELmar-C which sold for about the same price as the LTM 
>>>> model. It is quite good, but if you are looking to get the "special" 
>>>> look, skip the C.
>>>> 
>>>> LTM models and M models differ 10% in price..... and you do not need an 
>>>> adapter if you are using it on an M camera.  Why an LTM model?  LTM 
>>>> camera?
>>>> 
>>>> If you decide on any older Leica lens, check it for haze... a common 
>>>> remnant of outgassing of the lubricant originally used.  Common problem 
>>>> with lenses through the 70's.
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Frank Filippone
>>>> BMWRed735i at Gmail.com
>>>> On 7/17/2021 12:37 PM, Jeffery Smith via LUG wrote:
>>>>> My Erwin Puts books are back home in Louisiana. Does anyone have 
>>>>> experience or insight into this particular lens? I would like the 
>>>>> vintage portrait look, and this model doesn't seem particularly 
>>>>> coveted, at least not if price is an indicator.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Jeffery
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Leica Users Group.
>>>>> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Leica Users Group.
>>>> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Leica Users Group.
>>> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
>>> 
>> -- 
>> Jim Nichols
>> Tullahoma, TN USA
>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> Leica Users Group.
>> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Leica Users Group.
> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information



Replies: Reply from jhnichols at lighttube.net (Jim Nichols) ([Leica] Leica Elmar 90mm f4 LTM)
In reply to: Message from smithjeffery at mac.com (Jeffery Smith) ([Leica] Leica Elmar 90mm f4 LTM)
Message from bmwred735i at gmail.com (Frank Filippone) ([Leica] Leica Elmar 90mm f4 LTM)
Message from smithjeffery at mac.com (Jeffery Smith) ([Leica] Leica Elmar 90mm f4 LTM)
Message from jhnichols at lighttube.net (Jim Nichols) ([Leica] Leica Elmar 90mm f4 LTM)
Message from smithjeffery at mac.com (Jeffery Smith) ([Leica] Leica Elmar 90mm f4 LTM)